DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 8/12/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues on page 8, Schanke fails to teach the newly add limitation of claim 12 modified by removing “and/or”, thereby changing the scope of the claim.
The examiner respectfully disagrees with applicant assertion that Schanke fails to teach "a control unit or a regulating unit configured to control or regulate the at least one actuator of the device for the arranging or the providing of the marking depending on the control signals of the at least one sensor, measured values of the printer received via a data interface and confirmation messages of the printer received via the data interface," as now required by claim 1.
As discussed below, Schanke teaches a control unit, by disclosing a microprocessor. The examiner considers the limitation “to regulate” as to mean supervise by means of rules and regulations (as defined by Oxford Learner’s Dictionary) by control logic executed within the microprocessor. The control logic of the microprocessor receives signals from sensors 592 when the actuator makes contact with limit switches 592 during the insertion of a wire into the taught device. Hence, the microprocessor is regulating, i.e. supervising by means of the control logic, the actuator when sensing of the actuator makes contact with the switches, see Col. 16 lines 20-31 and Col. 17 lines 24-32. Thereby, the combination as a whole, teaches the claimed invention.
The examiner suggests further defining the structure of the actuator, i.e. motors or solenoids, and how they are controlled by the control unit based on sensors and their respective signals to overcome the current art rejection.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-2, 4-11 and 13-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites “a control unit or a regulating unit configured to control or regulate the at least one actuator of the device for the arranging or the providing of the marking depending on the control signals of the at least one sensor, measured values of the printer received via a data interface, confirmation messages of the printer received via the data interface, and control commands of the printer received via the data interface.” However, the limitation of measured values of the printer received via a data interface” is unclear. What are the measure values? What is doing the measuring and how is the control unit or regulating unit controlling the actuator depending on these measured values? The examiner is unclear as to how to apply art to this portion of the claim. Clarification is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 1-2, 6, 8-20, 22 and 23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schanke et al. (7,178,572) in view of Uchiyama (JP 2009197905A).
With respect to claim 1, Schanke et al. teaches a device (400) for providing a marking (i.e. a printed label media placed on a wire) arranged or arrangeable in a circumferentially closed manner around a prolate object (as device 308 provides is capable providing a label fully around a wire, depending on the size of the label and object themselves; Col. 10 lines 63 to Col. 11 line 6) comprising: a material interface (an interface at label wrapper 400) configured to receive a printed product (600) output from a printer (50) that is external to the device (as the device 400 is external to 308 which houses the printer 50); a print signal interface (i.e. an interface connected to a microprocessor; Col. 3 lines 44-47) configured to acquire a control signal related to the printed product output (as the microprocessor communicates and controls the various elements of the printer and labeler; Col. 3 lines 48-50); at least one sensor (207/592) configured to acquire a control signal related to the providing of the marking (i.e. as the encoder wheel 207 senses rotation of a ribbon spool indicating information of the marking of a label media 600 to be placed on the wire); and at least one actuator (593) configured to arrange the marking (i.e. the printed label as placed on the wire) on the object (i.e. wire) in a circumferentially closed manner or to provide the marking (i.e. the placed label on the wire) for circumferentially closed arrangement (as the label is taught to be wrapped around the wire, and therefore would be capable of being circumferentially closed depending on the diameter of the intended use wire) depending on the control signal (from the microprocessor) related to the printed product (i.e. printed label) output (from the printer) and the control signal (via 207) related to the providing of the marking (i.e. the printing of the label placed on the wire) using the printed product (600) output by the printer (as the control signal from encoder 207 is used to control the operation of the labeler based on when printing begins) and a control unit (i.e. microprocessor) configured to regulate (i.e. as the controller receives signals from the actuator making contact with limit switches 592 which supervise signals created by the actuator, under the broadest and reasonable interpretation and insofar as how “regulate” is structurally defined) the at least one actuator (as the controller is regulating the actuator through the sensing of the actuator when a wire is inserted into the device, Col. 16 lines 20-31 and Col. 17 lines 24-32) of the device (10) for the arranging or the providing of the marking (i.e. the printed label onto the wire) depending on the control signals of the at least one sensor (592) and confirmation messages of the printer via the data interface (i.e. confirmation messages, i.e. signals sent to the data interface which transmits information from system to another based on the sensors 207and 592 sensing the rotation of the ribbon and the insertion of the wire confirming printing has been initiated, insofar as how “massages” is structurally defined) and control commands (i.e. commands from the various motors and sensors within the printer) of the printer (50) received via the data interface (circuitry).
Schanke et al. remains silent regarding the sensor being configured to detected a size of the object and a control unit regulating the device depending on measured values of the printer received via a data interface.
Uchiyama teaches a similar device which includes a measuring device (46; [0048]) for measuring a diameter [0067], and a control unit to regulate the device depending on the measured values (as sensed by the measuring device 46; as best understood by the examiner in light of the above 112 rejection).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the instant invention to modify the sensor and control unit of Schanke et al. to include the light measuring structure and corresponding control logic of Uchiyama to measuring the size of the object because Uchiyama teaches such a modification ensures no abnormalities are occurring during conveyance of the object [0067], thereby preventing faults in the device via the modified controller of Schanke et al.
With respect to claim 2, Schanke et al. teaches the device (400) further comprising: a mechanical interface (100) configured to releasably or irreversibly attach the device to the printer (as the base assembly 100 allows for the label applicator to be slidably mounted and because the base assembly is a mechanical assembly, that assembly is capable of being releasably attached via bolts and nuts to the printer 50; Col. 3 lines 54-68).
With respect to claim 6, Schanke et al. teaches the device (400) wherein the print signal interface comprises a data interface (i.e. circuitry connected the printer and labeler; Col. 3 lines 41-50) configured to communicate (via the circuitry), with the printer (50) for the providing or the arranging (via the various motors) of the marking (i.e. the label to be wrapped around the wire).
With respect to claim 8, Schanke et al. teaches the device (400) wherein the data interface (i.e. the circuitry) is configured to synchronize or coordinate an event-driven operation of the at least one actuator (593) and the printer (50) for the providing or the arranging of the marking (as when the circuitry determines the wire is inserted, the actuator actuates the arms to prepare for the provided printed label).
With respect to claim 9, Schanke et al. teaches the device (400) wherein the data interface (i.e. the circuitry) is configured to enable the printer (50) to control the at least one actuator (593) of the device (10).
With respect to claim 10, Schanke et al. teaches the device (400) wherein the data interface (i.e. the circuitry) is configured to receive control commands for send control commands for controlling or regulating the printer (50) to the printer (50) based on the control signals from the at least one sensor (592; as once the switches 592 indicated a wire is loaded, printing is begun, Col. 17 lines 24-42).
With respect to claim 11, Schanke et al. teaches the device (400) wherein the data interface (i.e. the circuitry) is configured to send control signals of the at least one sensor (592) to the printer (50) for the providing or the arranging of the marking (i.e. to print onto the labels; Col. 17 lines 24-42).
With respect to claim 13, Schanke et al. teaches the device (400) wherein the control unit (i.e. microprocessor) is further configured to obtain a control command (i.e. a command issued from a sensor from an encoder of a printer) from the printer (50) via the data interface (i.e. the circuitry), to execute the controlling or the regulating of the at least one actuator (593) in accordance with the control command (i.e. the command that the wire is ready to receive a printed label), and to send a feedback to the printer (50) via the data interface (i.e. circuitry) in response to completion of the executing of the control command (so to start the printing process; Col. 17 lines 24-60).
With respect to claim 14, Schanke et al. teaches the device (400) wherein the control unit (i.e. microprocessor) is further configured to determine a parameter of the arranging (i.e. timing of arrangement onto the wire) based on the control signal acquired using the at least one sensor (592; as the signal from 592 indicate the start of the process) and to send the determined parameter (i.e. timing) to the printer (50) via the data interface (circuitry).
With respect to claim 15, Schanke et al. teaches the device (10) wherein the acquired control signal is indicative of a diameter of the object (as switches 592 create the control signal upon wire insertion, thereby the signal is indicative of a diameter of the object), and the determined parameter is indicative of a length of an advance or a retract of the printed product (as based on the size and timing of the wire, the determined parameter is indicative of a length of advance of the label).
With respect to claim 16, Schanke et al. teaches the device (400) wherein a control command (i.e. a print start command from a user when the user inserts the wire into the drive system; Col. 14 lines 46-63) sent from the device (400) to the printer (50) via the data interface (i.e. circuitry) initiates the advance or retract (i.e. as when the wire is inserted, label feeding is advanced for printing and wrapping).
With respect to claim 17, Schanke et al. teaches the device (400) wherein the control unit (i.e. the taught microprocessor) autonomously performs the providing or the arranging of the marking (i.e. the printed label), in accordance with the control command (sent from the encoder 207 of the printer) during a time period between obtaining the control command (i.e. the encoder 207 signal) from the printer (50) and sending the feedback to the printer (50 via the microprocessor).
With respect to claim 18, Schanke et al. teaches the device (400) further comprising: an electrical interface (i.e. electrical connection, as indirectly taught in Schanke; as the device of Schanke et al. uses electrical power to run the circuitry and motors via electrical connections from the power supply to the circuitry and motors) configured to supply electrical power to the device (10) via the printer (50; as the power flows from the power source to the device from the printer).
With respect to claim 19, Schanke et al. teaches the device (400) wherein the data interface and the electrical interface (i.e. the circuitry and electrical connections) is arranged relative to the mechanical interface (100) to contact the printer (50) for the communicating and for the supplying of electrical power (from the indirectly taught electrical power supply suppling the device electricity), respectively, when the device (400) attached to the printer (50) by means of the mechanical interface (100; as the circuitry and electrical connections are found within the device relative to the mechanical interface, thereby forming the device 10 itself).
With respect to claims 20 and 23, Schanke et al. teaches the device (400) wherein the object (102) comprises an electrical conductor (i.e. a wire; Col. 3 lines 44-47).
With respect to claim 22, Schanke et al. teaches a system (400) for providing a marking (i.e. a printed label as printed by a printer 50 and wrapped around a wire) arranged or arrangeable in a circumferentially closed manner around a prolate object (as device 400 is capable of wrapping a label fully around a wire, depending on the size of the label and object themselves; Col. 10 lines 63 to Col. 11 line 6), comprising: a printer (50), configured to output a printed product (600) and the device (400) of (rejected above) claim 1, wherein the material interface (338) is arranged, relative to the printer (50), to receive the printed material (600) output by the printer (50).
Claim(s) 4 and 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schanke et al. (7,178,572) in view of Uchiyama (JP 2009197905A), as applied to claim 1, further in view of Fries (2008/0073023).
With respect to claim 4, Schanke et al. teaches all that is claimed in the above rejection of claim 1, but remains silent regarding the device wherein the at least one sensor of the control signal related to the providing of the marking comprises a button, and the control signal related to the providing of the marking indicates an actuation of the button.
Fries teaches a similar device that includes a button (231), and the control signal related to the providing of the marking indicates an actuation of the button (as when the software button is depressed, a signal is created to indicated a start of the labeling processes [0090].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the instant invention to modify the device to include a button such that when it is depressed, the button starts the labeling process, as taught in Fries, thereby increasing the versatility of the device of Schanke et al. by giving a user an ability to control the device itself.
With respect to claim 5, Schanke et al. teaches all that is claimed in the above rejection of claim 1, but remains silent regarding the device wherein the print signal interface comprises a sensor configured to detect the printed product output by the printer.
Fries teaches a similar device that includes a sensor (404) configured to detect the printed product output by the printer [0098].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the instant invention to modify the device of Schanke et al. such that the print signal interface includes a sensor that detects the printed label by the printer as taught in Fries because Fries teaches such a sensor ensures the label is in the correct location prior to wrapping the label around a wire [0098], thereby improving the quality of the final product of Schanke et al.
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schanke et al. (7,178,572) in view of Uchiyama (JP 2009197905A), as applied to claim 7, further in view of Gitchell et al. (2015/0161558).
With respect to claim 7, Schanke et al. teaches all that is claimed in the above rejection of claim 1, but remains silent regarding the device wherein the data interface is configured for wireless communication.
Gitchell et al. teaches a similar device having a data interface that is configured for wireless communication [0040].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the instant invention to modify the device of Schanke et al. to include the wireless communication structures as taught in Gitchell et al. because Gitchell et al. teaches such structure allows for communication to occur to remote locations, thereby increasing the versatility of communication of the device taught in Schanke et al.
Claim(s) 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schanke et al. (7,178,572) in view of Uchiyama (JP 2009197905A), as applied to claim 1, further in view of Watanabe et al. (2006/0088360).
With respect to claim 21, Schanke et al. teaches all that is claimed in the above rejection of claim 1, but remains silent regarding wherein the mechanical interface (152) comprises a centering pin or an opening for receiving a centering pin, and/or wherein the mechanical interface (152) comprises a lever and an eccentric device connected to the lever in a rotationally fixed manner, the eccentric being configured to attach the device to the printer without screws and/or without tools.
Watanabe et al. teaches a similar device having a mechanical interface comprises a lever (73) and an eccentric device connected to the lever in a rotationally fixed manner (as the lever 73 contains an elongated hole 76 and shaft 77 which creates an eccentric device connection), the eccentric being configured to attach a device (500) to a printer (70) without screws and/or without tools (as seen in Fig. 3B).
Because both Schanke et al. and Watanabe et al. teach mechanical interfaces, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the instant invention to substitute the mechanical interface of Schanke et al with the mechanical interface taught by Watanabe et al. to achieve the predictable result of attaching modular printing elements together. Further, such a modification provides a simpler means of attachment, thereby improving the overall configurability of Schanke et al.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Jessup (2007/0029386) which teaches a method for placing RFID labels.
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MATTHEW G MARINI whose telephone number is (571) 272-2676. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8am-5pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Stephen Meier can be reached on 571-272-2149. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/MATTHEW G MARINI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2853